Here’s The Judge Who Just Said ‘No’ To Obama’s Amnesty, ‘Yes’ To The Constitution…

Obama’s immigration plans are thrown into disarray…

It was not really a surprise ruling, but it was a welcome and important one for Texas and a coalition of states that had sued to stop President Obama’s executive action to grant amnesty to as many as 5 million illegal immigrants.

As Western Journalismreported some ten days ago, pro-immigration activists had predicted the ruling that has just been handed down by a federal judge in Texas — an order temporarily blocking what many believe to be Obama’s unconstitutional action deferring deportation.

From the courthouse in Brownsville, TX, Judge Andrew Hanen late Monday essentially agreed with the states’ argument that Obama changed immigration law on his own, without congressional authority, thus placing a terrible financial burden on states.

“The court finds that the government’s failure to secure the border has exacerbated illegal immigration into this country.”

“Further, the record supports the finding that this lack of enforcement, combined with the country’s high rate of illegal immigration, significantly drains the states’ resources.”

The Washington Timesnotes that the judge’s order comes just hours before the federal government was set to begin accepting from illegal immigrants applications for amnesty — the process was to start on Wednesday.

Judge Hanen’s injunction doesn’t halt Obama’s unilateral orders permanently, it only blocks them temporarily, allowing the coalition of states led by Texas more time to pursue its lawsuit through the legal system.

“The court finds, when taking into consideration the interests of all concerned, the equities strongly favor the issuance of an injunction to preserve the status quo,” Judge Hanen wrote.

“It is preferable to have the legality of these actions determined before the fates of over four million individuals are decided. An injunction is the only way to accomplish that goal.”

Naturally, the Obama administration wasted no time in blasting the judge’s order, saying it “wrongly prevents these lawful, commonsense policies from taking effect and the Department of Justice has indicated that it will appeal that decision.”

The man the Obama White House says got it wrong, Judge Andrew Hanen, was appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush. His previous ruling on the Obama administration’s constitutionally questionable immigration actions was the reason amnesty supporters thought he would issue the injunction he just handed down.

The Washington Times explains:

In that ruling, Judge Hanen had spotted the surge of illegal immigrant children crossing the border earlier on, and had been critical of how Homeland Security officials had handled it, accusing them of being complicit in human trafficking because they would deliver the children to their illegal immigrant parents in the U.S. without trying to deport either party.

State Dept. On Islamic State: ‘We CANNOT Win This War By Killing Them’

This is why you don’t put liberals in charge of war. Killing Islamic State is the only way we will win this war.
Check it out:

State Department Spokesperson Marie Harf told Chris Matthews tonight that we cannot win this war with ISIS by killing them. She said we have to get to the root cause of why people are attracted to Jihad — you know like poverty, jobs, etc…

“We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians, so are the Jordanians. They’re in this fight with us. But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs…”

Boehner says ruling should clear path for Homeland Security funding

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ordered the government not to proceed with any portion of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, DAPA.

In his order, the federal judge said the court found “that at least one plaintiff has satisfied all the necessary elements to maintain a lawsuit and to obtain a temporary injunction.”

“The United States of America, its departments, agencies, officers, agents and employees and Jeh Johnson, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; R. Gil Kerlikowske, commissioner of United States customs and Border Protection; Ronald D. Vitiello, deputy chief of United States Border Patrol, United States Customs and Border Protection; Thomas S. Winkowski, acting director of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Leon Rodriguez, director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services are hereby enjoined from implementing any and all aspects or phases of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents.”

The outline of plans was “set out in the Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson’s memorandum dated November 20, 2014.”

The injunction is until “a final resolution of the merits of this case or until a further order of this court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit or the United States Supreme Court,” the judge ordered.

He cited the Obama administration’s failure to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.

Hanen also ordered that federal officials and agencies are further enjoined from implementing “any and all aspects or phases of the expansions (including any and all changes) to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.”

That was the program begun several years ago by Obama.

The judge also explained the defendants will be allowed to “reapproach this court for relief from this order, in the time period between the date of this order and the trial on the merits, for good cause, including if Congress passes legislation that authorizes DAPA or at such a time as the defendants have complied with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”

He scheduled a conference call for counsel following a Feb. 27 deadline for a schedule for the case to be processed.

House Speaker John Boehner’s reaction was that now that the ruling has been made, Democrats should end their opposition to a spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security.

The Washington Times said Boehner said Tuesday,“The president said 22 times he did not have the authority to take the very action on immigration he eventually did, so it is no surprise that at least one court has agreed. Hopefully, Senate Democrats who claim to oppose this executive overreach will now let the Senate begin debate on a bill to fund the Homeland Security Department.”

Congress is on vacation for the week, and there have been no indications from Democrats yet on any change in their position.

In Austin, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said, “President Obama abdicated his responsibility to uphold the United States Constitution when he attempted to circumvent the laws passed by Congress via executive fiat, and Judge Hanen’s decision rightly stops the president’s overreach in its tracks. We live in a nation governed by a system of checks and balances, and the president’s attempt to by-pass the will of the American people was successfully checked today. The district court’s ruling is very clear – it prevents the president from implementing the policies in ‘any and all aspects.’”

It’s one of two pending cases challenging Obama’s amnesty.

The other developed first and was thrown out at the district court level.

But it now is on a fast track before an appellate court in Washington, D.C.

It was filed by attorney Larry Klayman ofFreedom Watchon behalf of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Klayman told WND he’s waiting now for the government to respond to the appellate court.

“We want the D.C. court to enter a preliminary injunction, stopping everything in its tracks,” he said. “We’re confident that they will agree with us.”

Obama’s amnesty plans are forecast to allow at least another 5 million illegal aliens in the U.S. to be given legal status in which they could hold jobs and driver’s licenses. And critics say they would even be allowed to vote.

The case will determine whether or not the United States can be run by a president and his decrees, or by a chief elected official who enforces the laws Congress writes, according to Mark Krikorian, executive director of theCenter for Immigration Studies,which watches the immigration situation.

“If I were a Republican politician, I wouldn’t even be arguing this on the basis of immigration,” he told WND in an interview. “I would be talking about this as just the latest and most egregious example of a president’s rule by decree.”

He said the coming dispute, which very well may extend into the 2016 presidential election, is going to decide “the balance of powers, whether Congress actually makes law or is an advisory body like the U.N. General Assembly, which is how Obama sees it.”

Obama already has challenged America’s laws a multitude of times, simply issuing orders to make changes to the Obamacare law, and on a variety of other issues, all without a decision by Congress, which originally wrote the laws.

The fight over amnesty is one of two focal points – the other is Obamacare – of a letter-writing campaign to encourage GOP members of the U.S. House to replace Speaker John Boehner.

The“Dump Boehner Now” campaignallows voters to reach every Republican House member with hard-copy letters asking them to reconsider their choice as speaker. The letter says House members had the chance to stop Obamacare and amnesty, but Boehner failed to take advantage.

Joseph Farah, WND founder and campaign organizer, set up the letters campaign. He said the opposition to Boehner is based on the Obamacare and amnesty program that voters rejected in the 2014 midterm elections.

The letter explains to members of the U.S. House that two issues have “prompted Americans to turn in droves to the Republican Party in November 2014 – Barack Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive action to provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, and the deliberately deceptive restructuring of America’s health-care system through Obamacare, which threatens to unravel the greatest health delivery system in the world.”

Pointing out that Republicans before the election “solemnly vowed to STOP this lame-duck president,” the letter states: “Now you have the power, right and duty to stop him.

“But it won’t happen with John Boehner leading you. You know this to be true. The trillion-dollar budget deal is just the latest proof that Boehner is not capable of leading the House to victory during this critical period.”

It’s because during the lame-duck Congress, Boehner agreed to Obama’s plan to continue funding for Obamacare and amnesty into 2015.

MSNBC did a report only days agospeculating on whether Hanen would halt the federal plan. MSNBC called Hanen “a critic of the Obama administration’s immigration policies.”

Worried MSNBC: “If Hanen decides against the Obama administration, he could block the implementation of the executive measures, which are scheduled to kick in Feb. 18. If that were to happen, the Department of Justice would almost certainly appeal the decision, which would then go to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals – yet another conservative-leaning court.”

The fact that more than half the states are participating in the case has alarmed amnesty supporters, but they still hope more and more illegals come out of the shadows and claim a place at the head of the line of those awaiting official recognition in the U.S., or at least it appears that way.

Karen Tumlin of the National Immigration Law Center told MSNBC: “People have been waiting so long for a chance to come forward and be able to work with authorization and not be looking over their shoulder all day long. We’re really trying to send the message that this should be business as usual.”

House Republicans, under Boehner, also have said they are going to take court action but haven’t yet.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the decision was a victory.

“And a crucial first step in reining in President Obama’s lawlessness,” he added.

Klayman has explained it’s not a case mainly about immigration.

“This is fundamentally about the rule of law and our constitutional system,” he said.

“I know we would prefer, like all conservatives and patriots, to have a clear ruling that executive overreach by any president is a dangerous injury to our Constitution. Lawyers do recognize, however, that courts try to find the easiest way to reach a result. We hope to reach a ruling that the executive branch cannot rewrite the nation’s laws whether they go through the Administrative Procedures Act process or not,” Klayman said.

In an accompanying 123-page memorandum, Hanen wrote about the states’ interest in not allowing “their own resources” to be drained by the “constant influx of illegal immigrants.”

He found states “ultimately bear the brunt of illegal immigration.”

The opinion noted specifically that Washington “maintains that none of the plaintiffs have standing to bring this injunctive action.”

“The states disagree, claiming that the government cannot implement a substantive program and then insulate itself from legal challenges by those who suffer from its negative effects.”

The judge noted the reality of the immigration situation.

“When apprehending illegal aliens, the government often processes and releases them with only the promise that they will return for a hearing if and when the government decides to hold one. In the meantime, the states – with little or no help from the government – are required by law to provide various services to this population.”

He continued, “It is indisputable that the states are harmed to some extent by the government’s action and inaction in the area of immigration.”

The judge said Obama’s deferment program isn’t simply a matter of being forced to pick and choose cases because of limited resources. Washington’s current program “is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

“The DHS does have discretion in the manner in which it chooses to fulfill the expressed will of Congress. It cannot, however, enact a program whereby it not only ignores the dictates of Congress, but actively acts to thwart them,” the judge said.

Based on his comments at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama appears to harbor sympathy for America’s enemies. While Obama professes a loathing for terror, he appears to believe ISIS terrorists are not entirely unlike us. He perceives that the Christian world unjustly condescends when it condemns ISIS terrorists because, in his view, the Christian world is also guilty of acts of terror.

At the prayer breakfast, President Obama clumsily put it this way: “Unless we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” He pointed out further that “slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” He apparently concludes that terror “is not unique to one group or one religion.” Rather, he appears to be suggesting that we are all potential terrorists, regardless of our faiths, stating: “There is a tendency in us, a simple tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.”

In his tortured logic, Obama conveys the outrageous position that ISIS terrorists are like us. For Obama, we are all ISIS, we are all possessed of a tendency to pervert and distort faith to condone the genocide of innocents. The perspective offends when it comes from anyone in public office, but when it comes from the President, the Commander-in-Chief, and during a time of war when the nation is marshalling support for the obliteration of ISIS terrorists who seek to obliterate us, the comments are outrageous. They undermine the war effort. They show a lack of resolve to do whatever is necessary to destroy our dedicated enemies. Imagine the effect of these words on ISIS terrorists. Already predisposed to view America as weak because it can be counted upon not to take all steps necessary to annihilate them, ISIS terrorists now see that the civilian leader of the United States military sympathizes with them, even thinks they are like us.

The American people are not racist killers. Americans are not possessed of “a simple tendency” to “pervert and distort” their faiths to justify the murder of innocents, of those not possessed of their faith. We are a pluralistic society in which people of all faiths who practice their religions peaceably enjoy the free exercise of religion protected by our First Amendment. Those in this country who would justify murder based on religious sentiments are legally punished as murderers, not celebrated as heroes. We are not a people who support and maintain a genocidal theocracy that is intolerant of any dissent from a religious dictatorship. As a people, we have nothing in common with ISIS terrorists. They are not like us. They are dedicated to obliterate the American people and the nation. Indeed, they are dedicated to taking down all of Western civilization and murdering any who do not strictly adhere to their dictates.

There is no room among civilized people to sympathize with barbarians dedicated to our death and destruction. There is but one answer to that threat: to annihilate it. The Presidents’ remarks are so offensive precisely because he, the one who commands the soldiers who fight and die for this nation, reveals he sympathizes with our enemies. Imagine if Franklin Roosevelt were to have said of the Nazis as they exterminated the Jews as part of their effort to build a master race that we are like them, sharing their tendency to pervert and distort our faiths in ways that justify murder. Could we trust him to command American forces and to do what is necessary to obliterate the Nazis? Imagine if Roosevelt at the time of the Bataan Death March or Harry Truman on the eve of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were to have said that we should regard our Japanese Imperial enemies as harboring characteristics like our own, which characteristics help explain their tendency to kill.

Would we think either man fit to lead a nation into war that required complete victory? Without question, were either President to have voiced such sympathy for our enemies we would have been appalled and we could not have counted on those Presidents to do what was necessary to utterly defeat those dedicated to our destruction. Likewise, we cannot trust or rely upon Obama to achieve complete victory over our terrorist enemies.

It is all too clear why Obama refuses to employ maximum military force to completely obliterate ISIS. It is clear that he sympathizes with the most ardent and determined enemies of our nation, enemies that would just as soon sever the heads of every American citizen than tolerate for a fraction of a second a religious scruple not in strict alignment with their brand of radical Islam. President Obama is not up to the task of leading America to destroy those enemies. He is, therefore, at odds with the uniformed American soldier, at odds with the American people, and at odds with every other President who has served in the White House.

Before Obama, our nation did not have a President who favored appeasement of an enemy dedicated to our destruction. We did not have a Neville Chamberlain. Today Obama is our Neville Chamberlain.

Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Ron Paul calls Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says “all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, seven on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of the Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, Global Censorship of Health Information, and Restore the Republic. He is the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine and joins Robert Scott Bell weekly for “Jonathan Emord’s Sacred Fire of Liberty,” an hour-long radio program on government threats to individual liberty. For more info visit Emord.com, join the Emord FDA/FTC Law Group on Linkedin, and follow Jonathan on twitter (@jonathanwemord).

REV. FRANKLIN GRAHAM: Why Obama is Protecting Islam

Posted on February 18, 2015

The reverend isn’t beating around the bush on this interview. Check out what he has to say.

“The president is ignoring the fact that these are Islamic extremists. These are terrorists. And ISIS is a terrorist organization. And they are bent on destroying the West. They’ve already said they want the flag of Islam to fly over the White House.The president, his entire life his whole influence has been Islam.His mother has been married to a Muslim. His father is a Muslim. Then she married a man from Indonesia. He was raised in Indonesia. Went to Islamic schools. I assume she was a Muslim. So, his whole life experiences have been surrounded by Islam.He only knows Islam. And, he’s given a pass to Islam.He’s refusing to accept and understand the evil that is in front of him.”

With threats on the American homeland from ISIS leaders, the nation’s southern border scandalously unguarded, ever-increasing Islamic subversion within the U.S., and growing concerns among citizens over terror attacks – now there’s this.Scattered across the United States, rarely publicized by the “mainstream” news media, are three dozen Islamic terrorist training compounds, according to a powerful film documentary. Under the leadership of a radical Pakistani cleric, Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, his U.S.-based group called “Muslims of the Americas” has thousands of devoted followers who, claims the documentary, are being groomed for “Homegrown Jihad.”

Today only, WND readers can get this eye-opening and important film documentary on DVD, titled

“Homegrown Jihad: The Terrorist Camps Around the U.S.” – for only $4.95, a huge $20 discount off the normal $25 price!In never-before-seen video footage, the documentary exposes these dangerous jihad-training compounds and reveals a secret training tape in which American Muslims are recruited to “join one of the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare” … right here in America!They are called “Soldiers of Allah” and they are trained in explosives, kidnapping, murder, firing weapons and guerilla warfare, says the filmmakers. And they are told, “Act like you are a friend, then kill him just like from the book.”Earlier this year, declassified FBI documents confirmed the existence of one such Islamic jihadist enclave in Texas, part of the same U.S.-based network of training camps, and identified by the Department of Homeland Security as connected to a terrorist organization. The Texas enclave belongs to Muslims of the Americas, which is linked to the Pakistani-based militant group Jamaat al-Fuqra, according to an investigation by the Clarion Project and ACT! For America Houston.

Jamaat al-Fuqra was founded in New York in 1980 by Gilani, who at one time was in Pakistani custody in connection with the abduction of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Pearl was later beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whom the “9/11 Commission Report” identified as “the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks.”

“Muslims of the Americas” claims it has a network of 22 “villages” around the U.S., with headquarters at an encampment in the Catskill Mountains near Hancock, N.Y., called Holy Islamberg, as

WND has reported. An investigative report at the time found neighbors of Islamberg were deeply concerned about military-style training taking place there and frustrated by an apparent lack of attention from federal authorities.WND also has reported that Jamaat al-Fuqra has collaborated with major terrorist organizations, including Hezbollah and al-Qaida.

The FBI describes the compound in Texas, called Mahmoudberg, as an “enclave” and “communal living site.” Located in Brazoria County along County Road 3 near Sweeny, Texas, it was discovered by the FBI through a tip from an informant in New York, according to the Clarion Project.The Texas commune, in a heavily wooded area, is estimated by a local resident who spoke to ACT researchers to encompass about 25 acres. It dates back to the late 1980s, the resident said, which is confirmed by the FBI documents.The FBI reported in 2007 that one commune resident formerly was a leader at the Muslims of the Americas compound in Badger, Calif., called Baladullah. In March 2001, a Baladullah member had been arrested for transporting guns between New York and South Carolina. Another was charged with murdering a police deputy that caught him breaking and entering a home. The declassified FBI documents show that the enclave is not the only affiliate of the organization that has operated in the state.

A 2003 FBI report states that investigation of MOA “is based on specific and articulate facts giving justification to believe they are engaged in international terrorism.”

Last year, Muslims of the Americas filed a lawsuit against the nonprofit Christian Action Network for defamation and libel after CAN’s publication of the book “Twilight in America: The Untold Story of Islamist Terrorist Training Camps Inside America.”

The book accuses Muslims of the Americas of “acting as a front for the radical Islamist group Jamaat al-Fuqra.”

Much of the book is based on the investigation of a former NYPD undercover informant who spent eight years posing as a member of the group.

Joseph Bodansky, the former director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, has affirmed Jamaat al-Fuqra operations in the U.S. have been known to the FBI and CIA for decades.

Hayden: Obama ‘Trapped by Own Words’ on Islamic Terror

By Melissa Clyne

The Obama administration needs to square with the American people about the real threats posed by the Islamic State (ISIS), including calling the group’s members radical Islamists, former National Security Agency Director and retired Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden said Tuesday during an appearance on Newsmax TV’s “America’s Forum.”
“These folks aren’t 10-feet tall, but they’re not the JV team either,” he said. “So we need to be wise and calculating in our response, not giving them more credit than credit’s due, but certainly recognizing them for what they are and, at a minimum, we’ve been late in doing that from my point of view.”Story continues below video.

Note:Watch Newsmax TV now on DIRECTV Ch. 349 and DISH Ch. 223
Get Newsmax TV on your cable system – Click Here Now

He compared the administration to a beat cop telling the crowd “move along folks, there’s nothing interesting to see here, where there’s an awful lot of interesting things to see.”
The disintegration of Iraq and Syria and the rise of ISIS, which threatens all governments in the region, is a “nightmare scenario,” according to Hayden, who said the Obama administration has “trapped itself” in refusing to identify the terrorists as radical Islamists.
“Now it’s going to be a massive news story when they start talking about radical Islam, and unfortunately they’ve trapped themselves into this approach that day by day is getting less useful and more confusing for our own efforts,” he said, adding that “it’s not about all of Islam and it’s certainly not about all Muslims, but it is fundamentally about Islam.”
Obama has drawn across-the-board criticism for a series of faux pas regarding acts of terror in Paris and Libya.
Obama characterized the victims, all Jewish, in last month’s terror attack at a Paris kosher deli as “random,” and when discussing this weekend’s video of ISIS militants beheading 21 Coptic Christians in Libya, Press Secretary Josh Earnestreferred to the victimsas “Egyptian citizens” and never mentioned their faith.
Lawyer and author Alan Dershowitz saidon Newsmax TV last week that Obama “did a terrible disservice” to European Jews by calling the Paris deli murders a random offshoot of the al-Qaida-inspired Charlie Hebdo massacre. And Earnest compounded the error by insisting the president was right.

“The big mistake was doubling down,” Dershowitz told “MidPoint” host Ed Berliner.
Dershowitz joined other prominent public figures, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, in urging the president to apologize for diminishing the threat to Jews at a time of Islamist terror and rising global anti-Semitism.
Last month, Earnest defended the Obama administration’s refusalto use the term “radical Islam” for the people carrying out terrorist attacks, saying it was not accurate and would only serve to legitimize their claim to be part of the religion.
Talk show host Joe Scarborough on Tuesdayquestioned why President Barack Obama was “vague” when talking about the threat posed by ISIS, and wondered why he wouldn’t use the words “radical Islamists” to describe the militant group.
“Why is he being vague? I’m not saying this as a Republican. I’m not saying this as a conservative. Why won’t he call this what it is when Europeans are? And, by the way, Arabs in the Middle East call this radical Islam,” Scarborough asked the MSNBC “Morning Joe” panel on Tuesday. “Why is he trying to put a smoke screen over the truth? What is he afraid of?”
While an authorization for use of military forceis technically not needed for the president to go to war with ISIS, Hayden said that relying on one authorized in 2001-2002 is “getting to be very, very thin legal thread.”

“Let’s get both political branches signing up, we’re going to go make war on ISIS,” he said.Material from Newsmax writers Wanda Carruthers, Greg Richter and Sean Piccoli was used in this report.

Putin Paranoia

Hopefully, the shaky truce between Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Petro Poroshenko, brokered in Minsk by Angela Merkel, will hold.

For nothing good, but much evil, could come of broadening and lengthening this war that has cost the lives of 5,400 Ukrainians.

The longer it goes on, the greater the casualties, the more land Ukraine will lose, and the greater the likelihood Kiev will end up an amputated and bankrupt republic, a dependency the size of France on the doorstep of Europe.

Had no truce been achieved, 8,000 Ukrainian troops trapped in the Debaltseve pocket could have been forced to surrender or wiped out, causing a regime crisis in Kiev. U.S. weapons could have begun flowing in, setting the stage for a collision between Russia and the United States.

One understands Russia’s vital interest in retaining its Black Sea naval base in Crimea, and keeping Ukraine out of NATO. And one sees the vital interest of Ukraine in not losing the Donbas.

But what is America’s vital interest here?

Merkel says a great principle is at stake, that in post-Cold War Europe, borders are not to be changed by force.

That is idealistic, but is it realistic?

At the Cold War’s end, Yugoslavia split into seven nations, the USSR into 15. Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, even Slovenia briefly, had to fight to break free. So, too, did the statelets of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in breaking from Georgia, and Transnistria from Moldova.

Inside Russia there are still minorities such as the Chechens who wish to break free. And in many of the new nations like Ukraine, there are ethnic Russians who want to go home.

Indeed, a spirit of secessionism pervades the continent of Europe.

But while London permitted the Scottish secessionists a vote, Madrid refuses to concede that right to the Basques or Catalans. And some of these ethnic minorities may one day fight to break free, as the Irish did a century ago.

Yet of all of the secessionist movements from the Atlantic to the Urals, none imperils a vital interest of the United States. None is really our business. And none justifies a war with Russia.

Indeed, what is it about this generation of Americans that makes us such compulsive meddlers in the affairs of nations we could not find on a map? Consider if you will our particular affliction: Putin paranoia.

Forty years ago, this writer was in Moscow with Richard Nixon on his last summit with Leonid Brezhnev. It was not a contentious affair, though the USSR was then the command center of an immense empire that stretched from Berlin to the Bering Sea.

And when we are warned that Putin wishes to restore that USSR of 1974, and to reassemble that Soviet Empire of yesterday, have we really considered what that would require of him?

To restore the USSR, Putin would have to recapture Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, an area the size of the United States.

To resurrect the Soviet Empire, Putin would have to invade and occupy Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, and then overrun Germany to the Elbe River.

How far along is Putin in re-establishing the empire of the czars and commissars? He has reannexed Crimea, which is roughly the size of Vermont, and which the Romanovs acquired in the 18th century.

Yet almost daily we hear the din from Capitol Hill, “The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!”

That there is bad blood between America and Putin is undeniable. And, indeed, Putin has his quarrels with us as well.

In his eyes, we took advantage of the dissolution of the USSR to move NATO into Eastern Europe and the Baltic republics. We used our color-coded revolutions to dump over pro-Russian regimes in Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan.

Yet beyond our mutual distrust, or even contempt, is there not common ground between us?

As the century unfolds, two clear and present dangers threaten U.S. strategic interests: the rising power of a covetous China and the spread of Islamic terrorism.

In dealing with both, Russia is a natural ally. China sees Siberia and the Russian Far East, with its shrinking population, as a storehouse of the resources Beijing needs.

And against the Taliban in Afghanistan, ISIS in Iraq and Syria, and al-Qaida, Russia, which suffered in Beslan and Moscow what New York, London, Madrid, Paris and Copenhagen have suffered, is on our side.

During the Cold War, Russia was in thrall to an ideology hostile to all we believed in. She had rulers who commanded a world empire.

Yet we had presidents who could do business with Moscow.

If we could negotiate with neo-Stalinists issues as grave as the the Berlin Wall, and ballistic missiles in Cuba, why cannot we sit down with Vladimir Putin and discuss less earthshaking matters, such as whose flag should fly over Luhansk and Donetsk?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Hayden: Obama ‘Trapped by Own Words’ on Islamic Terror

By Melissa Clyne

The Obama administration needs to square with the American people about the real threats posed by the Islamic State (ISIS), including calling the group’s members radical Islamists, former National Security Agency Director and retired Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden said Tuesday during an appearance on Newsmax TV’s “America’s Forum.”

“These folks aren’t 10-feet tall, but they’re not the JV team either,” he said. “So we need to be wise and calculating in our response, not giving them more credit than credit’s due, but certainly recognizing them for what they are and, at a minimum, we’ve been late in doing that from my point of view.”

He compared the administration to a beat cop telling the crowd “move along folks, there’s nothing interesting to see here, where there’s an awful lot of interesting things to see.”

The disintegration of Iraq and Syria and the rise of ISIS, which threatens all governments in the region, is a “nightmare scenario,” according to Hayden, who said the Obama administration has “trapped itself” in refusing to identify the terrorists as radical Islamists.

“Now it’s going to be a massive news story when they start talking about radical Islam, and unfortunately they’ve trapped themselves into this approach that day by day is getting less useful and more confusing for our own efforts,” he said, adding that “it’s not about all of Islam and it’s certainly not about all Muslims, but it is fundamentally about Islam.”

Obama has drawn across-the-board criticism for a series of faux pas regarding acts of terror in Paris and Libya.

Obama characterized the victims, all Jewish, in last month’s terror attack at a Paris kosher deli as “random,” and when discussing this weekend’s video of ISIS militants beheading 21 Coptic Christians in Libya, Press Secretary Josh Earnestreferred to the victimsas “Egyptian citizens” and never mentioned their faith.

Lawyer and author Alan Dershowitz said on Newsmax TV last week that Obama “did a terrible disservice” to European Jews by calling the Paris deli murders a random offshoot of the al-Qaida-inspired Charlie Hebdo massacre. And Earnest compounded the error by insisting the president was right.

Dershowitz joined other prominent public figures, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, in urging the president to apologize for diminishing the threat to Jews at a time of Islamist terror and rising global anti-Semitism.

Last month, Earnest defended the Obama administration’s refusal to use the term “radical Islam” for the people carrying out terrorist attacks, saying it was not accurate and would only serve to legitimize their claim to be part of the religion.

Talk show host Joe Scarborough on Tuesday questioned why President Barack Obama was “vague” when talking about the threat posed by ISIS, and wondered why he wouldn’t use the words “radical Islamists” to describe the militant group.

“Why is he being vague? I’m not saying this as a Republican. I’m not saying this as a conservative. Why won’t he call this what it is when Europeans are? And, by the way, Arabs in the Middle East call this radical Islam,” Scarborough asked the MSNBC “Morning Joe” panel on Tuesday. “Why is he trying to put a smoke screen over the truth? What is he afraid of?”

While an authorization for use of military force is technically not needed for the president to go to war with ISIS, Hayden said that relying on one authorized in 2001-2002 is “getting to be very, very thin legal thread.”

“Let’s get both political branches signing up, we’re going to go make war on ISIS,” he said.

Even the American left is finally realizing that this is the strangest
administration in living memory. Obama simply has no real precedents,
which is why he seems so utterly foreign. American presidents tend to be
pragmatists, but Obama is locked into a simpleminded ideology of Good vs.
Evil. Obama is Good, and anybody who disagrees with him is Evil.
Much of this oddity stems from the president?s personality, which many
people have described as a mix of major narcissism, borderline
personality disorder, and oppositional defiant disorder. Personality
disordered people can be very functional in their jobs. But they are very
destructive to others. People with such disorders rarely admit they can
be wrong. Narcissism is almost defined by that feature: someone who knows
with godlike certainty that he is right all the time, who cannot admit a
fault, and who therefore needs to blame others every time something goes
wrong. Obama does this with almost robotic regularity.
Historically, the most destructive leaders are malignant narcissists with
a sociopathic streak, superficially charming and impressive, but
manipulative, heartless, and intent on constantly smearing their
perceived enemies.
Bill Clinton is also a major narcissist, but as an adult he did not have
a compulsion to constantly malign other people. Clinton has recently said
that he truly hates Obama, and he knows the man. Imagine the firestorm if
any Republican said that.

Now it seems that Obama wants to torpedo Hillary?s campaign and support
Elizabeth Warren, the phony affirmative action Indian at Harvard Law, to
force more leftist radicalism on the American people. Hillary looks tired
and confused, while Warren is a major rabble-rouser for the left, just
like our current Occupant.
Active malevolence toward mainstream America is very much in character
for the hard left. They hate you and me for what Joe McCarthy did sixty
years ago to the Stalinist left; and the more we learn about that
history, the more it seems that the anti-communists were right. Their
list of America-haters is endless: Jerry Wright preached hatred for 20
years to the Obamas. Franklin Marshall Davis, Obama?s teenage ?mentor?,
the Hawaiian CPUSA rep and soi-disant poet, specialized in the poetry of
racial rage. Bill Ayers stands by his old demand to ?kill your parents.?
Chris Matthews, who seemed sane and balanced when he worked for Tip
O?Neill, is getting paid by his bosses at Comcast and GE for genuine hate
speech against the rest of us.

(Research supports the idea that these destructive traits can be
solidified by years of drug use, especially crystal meth, but also
cannabis.)

The most ironic thing is to watch the left complaining about
?divisiveness? when the rest of America will not bow to them —
revealing their sense of narcissistic entitlement. Like any closed cult,
they know they are completely right, and therefore entitled to power over
others, no matter how corrupt and illegal. Lois Lerner has now been shown
to have this kind of entitled rage. It cannot be overemphasized that
these are standard features of psychiatric disorders.

Obama grew up among such people, as he tells us in his autobiographies.
His amazing sense of more-than-human entitlement combines his own history
— the fact that he was rejected at age ten by his mother, who sent him
to Hawaii — together with the radical cult that raised him. Obama is so
cocksure that he can?t imagine how sane and decent people could disagree.
This is different from other presidents: Clinton and LBJ certainly were
power hungry, but they knew when to compromise.
The parallels with violent Muslims are striking. Aggressive Muslims feel
they are entitled to rule the world. Any competing faith makes you an
enemy — Buddhist, atheist, Christian, Jewish. They are told so every
Friday night by their imams and mullahs — which is why Muslim mobs have
always gone on rampages on Fridays. There is a strong link between hate
preaching and terrorist violence in the Muslim world. The Saudis have
long sponsored Nazilike hate radio and TV through the Arab and Persian
media (see MEMRI.org for daily translations.)
The obvious reason for Hamas and other theocratic Israel-haters is the
fact that Israel owns most of Jerusalem. Liberals never seem to
understand that idea, because they live in a fantasy world where religion
is on its way out, and soon we will live in soft Marxist paradise,
atheists one and all. Nobody in Russia and China believes that anymore,
because Stalin and Mao tried to abolish religion for decades and failed.
Today, Putin acts like a Russian Orthodox believer (when it suits him),
and the Chinese are constantly suppressing religious revivals in Beijing.
Only the Western left believes in that ole-time religion of militant
atheism.
In sum, Obama is deeply stuck in his mental quarrel with America. His
anti-American, anti-middle class rhetoric is remarkably stereotyped,
which raises the possibility that he is cognitively rigid — unable to
change his mind in the face of facts. Rigid leaders can?t adjust when the
facts change, as they always do in politics.
Which brings me to the genuine Dark Side of humanity, and the stunning
support this administration gives to it.
YouTube and social media have now penetrated the liberal media defense
against Islamofascist cruelties.
Ask yourself whether we are not honestly seeing the face of evil in this
list. Please show it to your liberal friends. [MULTIPLE LINKS…]

4. This article by Alan Dershowitz, a leftist, about the tiny tribal
regime of Qatar financing Hamas and other killers. (The Saudis, Egyptians
and other Arab regimes are currently fighting Qatar for fear of the
greater enemy, Iran.)

6. This Dutch woman, severely beaten for flying the Israeli flag from her
balcony — in the Netherlands.

7. This Canadian lawsuit accusing Pamela Geller of racial incitement for
ads aimed at abused and threatened women in Muslim families.

7. This lovely group photo of five black-clad women demanding harsher
persecutions by ISIS (an Al Qaida offshoot) in Iraq.

8. This Australian jihadist, surrounded by severed heads of his victims
in Syria.

9. This Muslim child-rape gang in England.

10. This Pakistani mob, killing a mother and two little girls for their
Ahmadiyya faith.

I know that American Thinker?s readers are aware of these things. My
constant question is: Why do Obama and our political-media elite pretend
they don?t know? Obama lived four years in Jakarta, Indonesia, in the
aftermath of exactly this kind of jihadist civil war. He knows, he knows.
The answer has to be that our ruling left has simply chosen to appease or
support the Dark Side.
Whether they are bribed by the oil regimes, or whether they have utterly
immoral beliefs, they are no longer interested in fighting evil. In fact,
in all cases listed above, the United States under Obama and his crowd
has actively supported the worst side.
When all is said and done, the answer is simple.
This administration, and our political-media elites, no longer supports
good against evil.
That is why they must be fired and discredited as soon as possible.

Source/Links: http://bit.ly/1neKOHA
Remember in November
—“Apparently, the leading cause of hard drive failures is subpoenas.?
(Clarice Feldman)
“Never underestimate the willingness of white progressives to be offended
on behalf of people who aren?t and to impose their will on those who
didn?t ask for it.” (Derek Hunter)
“If the Democrats didn?t have double standards, they wouldn?t have any
standards all.” (Chuck Lehmann)

HOST J.D. HAYWORTH: Let me ask you about the situation that’s unfolding now. The funding for the Department of Homeland Security has not been secured, has not been given by the Congress. The president is moving full-speed ahead with his executive amnesty. If you had advice for the Senate and House leadership, what would it be?

CARSON: I would say break the funding for Homeland Security up into parcels. Don’t present it as a whole bill. That makes it much more difficult for him to stand in the way. And, if he does stand in the way, particularly with things that are vital to the security of this country, then I think we can start talking about treason.

HAYWORTH: Would you repeat that statement?

CARSON: If things are done that are contrary to the security of this country, whoever does them is guilty of treason.

Obama to host summit on extremism

No names mentioned on who is extreme….
Check it out:

The White House on Tuesday will begin hosting a three-day summit to examine ways to counter violent extremism.

The meeting will put a special emphasis on domestic and international efforts to prevent extremists and their backers from radicalizing young people.The conference, which has been in the works for months, comes just days after fighters with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) executed 21 Egyptians and weekend terrorist attacks in Copenhagen left two people dead.

U.S. to Equip Moderate Syrian Rebels: Defense Official

BY JIM MIKLASZEWSKI

The U.S. will provide moderate Syrian rebels with “light pickup trucks, mortars and small arms” to defend themselves against extremists like ISIS and Syrian military forces, but no decision has been made to conduct U.S. airstrikes against enemy targets, a senior defense official told NBC News on Tuesday.

“We’re just not there yet,” the official said of reports that the U.S. has agreed to offer the weapons, equipment and support that was provided to Kurdish fighters who called in U.S. airstrikes to drive ISIS out of the Syrian town of Kobani last month. The U.S. and allies launched more than 700 air strikes against ISIS in and around Kobani from Aug. 8 to late January.

The defense official told NBC News that launching U.S. airstrikes to support the Kurds — a well-trained and disciplined military force — against an ISIS enemy confined to a relatively small area was a far more “controllable” situation than providing such support to the moderate Syrian rebels would be.

For now, the goal is to train and equip the rebels as a “defensive, not offensive, force” to protect their villages and surrounding territory, the official said. And the equipment and weapons would be provided “only after those rebels are fully vetted and trained” by the U.S. military.

ISIS Book Author: 45 Burnings Prove Atrocities of the Dark Ages

By Todd Beamon

Reports Tuesday that the Islamic State burned to death 45 people in Iraq just days after posting a video showing the beheadings of 21 Egyptian Christians proves that “we’re witnessing atrocities that were reserved for the Dark Ages,” Los Angeles author Johnnie Moore told Newsmax.
“Just as soon as you think it can’t get worse, it gets worse,” said Moore, whose book detailing ISIS’ persecution of non-Muslims is to be published next month. He is a former senior vice president of Liberty University.
“My concern is that it’s going to get worse and worse and worse,” he said.
Pete Hoekstra, the former Michigan congressman who once chaired the House Intelligence Committee, said the deaths clearly reflect an emboldened Islamic State.
“What the radical jihadists are learning is that for much of the West, the response is temporary, and it is restrained,” he told Newsmax.
“It’s one thing to go after these folks with limited airstrikes — but if you really want to stop these folks, everyone agrees that you’ve got to get boots on the ground, you’ve got to find these folks, and you’ve got to either capture them or kill them.

“It’s not a complex formula, but that doesn’t happen,” Hoekstra said.
Local Iraqi authorities said Tuesday that terrorists had burned to death 45 people in the western Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi.
Col. Qasim al-Obeidi, a local police chief, toldBBC Newsthat he believed some of those murdered belonged to security forces. He said he did not know who was killed or why they were burned to death, and his report could not be immediately confirmed.
ISIS captured much of the town, which is near the al-Asad air base about 100 miles west of Baghdad, last week. U.S. Marines are stationed at the base, providing training to Iraqi soldiers.
Al-Obeidi told the BBC that a compound that housed the families of security personnel and local officials had been attacked by ISIS jihadists. The police chief turned to the international community for help.
The alleged murders come after several videos have been posted on social media in recent weeks showing ISIS terrorists committing numerous atrocities: the torching of a Jordanian pilot, Muath al-Kasaesbeh, 26, who was captured after his plane crashed in Iraq on Christmas Eve; the parading of 17 caged Kurdish fightersthrough the streets of Iraq, all clad in orange prison garb; and the beheadings of the 21 Coptic Christiansover the weekend.

In addition, the Obama administration and the family of U.S. aid worker Kayla Mueller confirmed her deathby ISIS earlier this month. Mueller, 26, of Prescott, Arizona, was the last-known American hostage to be killed by the jihadists. She was captured in August 2013.
“We’re witnessing a vacuum of power in the region that is allowing literally the most horrific actors in modern times to have all the power and all the opportunity that they want to exhibit as much horror as they want,” said Moore, the author of the forthcoming book, “Defying ISIS: Preserving Christianity in the Place of Its Birth and in Your Own Backyard.”

“It’s going to take a global response and global solutions, and the entire world is going to have to do everything in their power to stop it,” he said. “It’s amazing that in just a few days, we’ve seen a whole century’s worth of horrific things happening and they’re not going to stop until they’re stopped,” Moore said.
Perhaps the greatest danger is that ISIS could eliminate Christianity from the Middle East, he said.
“We’re watching a once-in-a-thousand-year assault on Christianity in the region. These are harmless people. … That’s why they’re so easy to kill.

“Here we are in the modern world, and we’re allowing all this to happen, these people to be picked off, one by one,” Moore said. “It’s not inconceivable that Christianity can be eradicated from the place of its birth after surviving thousands and thousands of years.
“In the 21st century, it could all be gone,” he said.
Hoekstra slammed the Obama administration for its weak response to ISIS.
“The message to ISIS from the West is that it is mostly talk and bluster and very little action,” he said.
Both Hoekstra and Moore told Newsmax that the immediate solution is to send lethal military weapons and related support to the Kurds and Sunni Muslims in the region.
“They all are begging for additional equipment and training from the United States,” Hoekstra said. “They’re not asking for troops. They’re not asking for American boots on the ground.
“They are saying, ‘Give us the training and the equipment, and we will move the scourge of ISIS from Iraq and Libya.’ It doesn’t clear the whole problem, but it sends a clear message,” he said.
“Now, we need to do everything we can to help them, whatever it is,” Moore said. “Like we did with Ebola — it’s all hands on deck.
“If we don’t handle it, we’re going to see more of what we’ve seen in France, in Belgium, in Toronto, and in this country. It’s got to be rooted out and handled.
“The experts are the people in the region,” he added. “We have to work with those who peaceably deal with their neighbors.”
The BBC report came as the Obama administration convened a three-day summitat the White House on countering violent extremism.
The event, chaired by Vice President Joe Biden, is expected to highlight domestic and international efforts to prevent extremists and their supporters from radicalizing, recruiting, and inspiring others — particularly disaffected young people.

The conference is designed to share best practices and emerging strategies to prevent extremists from carrying out violent acts. President Barack Obama will address a related gathering on Wednesday.
Hoekstra noted reports that State Department officials had recommended that the U.S. fund economic development efforts in the region.
“Excuse me, but a lot of the studies and research have shown that a lot of these people are coming from middle-class families,” he said, referring to ISIS fighters. “They’re not coming from families in despair.
“I don’t have much hope in this conference.”
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/ISIS-burnings-Dark-Ages-barbaric/2015/02/17/id/625358/#ixzz3S6euckhq